I think the URL in the subject sums up quiet nicely the various
arguments people have conjured up to say SCO is "attacking" Linux.
Regardless of the validity of SCO's claim, this is simply false. If it
were true, SCO would be suing Linus Torvalds and not a mega-corporation.
It would be much easier to brow beat/bankrupt an individual instead of
fighting the world's largest computer company.

As far as I am concerned, the issue is between SCO and the various
companies that licensed SVRx from them. If these companies broke their
license agreements, tough for them. If IBM didn't break their agreement,
them SCO should stop making claims and make products. If someone break's
Linux license or *BSD's licenses, I hope they get sued too. That's all I
want to say.

I am really annoyed at open source advocates jumping in on an issue that
doesn't concern them directly. What is worse is that those who jump in
seem to completely mystified at what SCO is actually claiming. The
actual text of the claim is quiet clear and easily understandable and I
encourage everyone to actually READ it FIRST, then read the "rebuttal"
posted by the advocates. In my opinion, anyone who claims SCO doesn't
own UNIX and has no right to license it to IBM is smoking too much of a
certain illegal substance. The issue is what IBM did or did not do.